Gordon Brown: At its meeting of 24 January 2006 the Economic and Financial Affairs Council took note of a presentation from the current Austrian and future Finnish presidencies on a work programme for ECOFIN for 2006.
	The Council adopted Opinions on the Stability and Convergence Programmes for Finland, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Slovakia and Sweden and adopted a decision under article 104(6) and a recommendation under article 104(7) of the EC Treaty with regard to the UK.
	The Council discussed procedures for following up matters relating to the forthcoming Commission Annual Progress Report on the Lisbon Strategy in the run-up to the Spring European Council.
	The Council adopted conclusions on an Economic Policy Committee Report regarding the quality of public finances in the EU.
	The Austrian presidency concluded that, subject to confirmation by the Czech Republic, Poland and Cyprus, political agreement could be reached on an extension of the arrangements for reduced rates of VAT for labour intensive services until 2010. The presidency subsequently announced on 30 January that the Czech Republic and Cyprus had agreed the proposal. Discussions are ongoing between the presidency and Poland.
	The Council held an exchange of views on issues related to energy markets.
	My right hon. Friend the Paymaster General, represented the UK.

Harriet Harman: My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Baroness Ashton of Upholland) has made the following written ministerial statement.
	"The Judicial Appointments Annual Report, covering the period 1 April 2004 to 30 September 2005, is published today, 31 January. This year the report continues to focus on developments and achievements within the judicial appointments process and the work undertaken ahead of the new Judicial Appointments Commission. We have placed the full statistical tables, which give the results of the various competitions held within the period of the report and their supporting narrative, on the departmental website at: www.dca.gov.uk. The report also shows that:
	Some 549 appointments were made during 2004–05 from around 3,500 applications.
	Appointments, including lay appointments, of minority ethnic candidates accounted for 12 per cent. of those made over the 18 month period.
	Women accounted for 37 per cent. of appointments.
	Since 1 April 2005 women have made up 46 per cent. and minority ethnic groups 17 per cent. of all appointments.
	The report also outlines improvements made to the judicial appointments process, including the introduction of competence based selection for all judicial appointments and the pilots of assessment centre-based recruitment for Recorder and Employment Tribunal appointments.
	Copies of the report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and is also available on the Department's website at: www.dca.gov.uk".

Don Touhig: I am pleased to announce to Parliament my decision on the future of the Met Office forecast production network.
	The Met Office has a responsibility to provide value for money to the taxpayer, to deliver the UK's Public Weather Service in the most efficient and effective manner and to provide the best possible service to all its customers. A thorough review and analysis of the Met Office's production network has been carried out. This included an extensive consultation exercise which took place between July and November 2005 involving customers, parliamentarians, trades unions, staff and other interested parties.
	I am grateful to the many individuals and groups who took part in this consultation. It generated a great deal of useful feedback. Indeed, based on a number of the constructive comments received, the Met Office was able to produce an additional option for consultation, as a result of which I agreed an extension to the consultation period.
	Having carefully weighed the various issues and arguments, I have decided that the best solution for the future of the Met Office and its customers is to centralise more forecast production at the Met Office HQ in Exeter, while retaining production capability in Aberdeen and a reduced regional network focusing primarily on service delivery. Forecast advisers within the regional network will take a proactive role with customers to identify regional weather impacts, and deliver the Met Office's OpenRoad, Marine and Public Weather Services.
	I am confident that this decision will deliver significant benefits to the Met Office, the UK taxpayer and all the Met Office's customers.

Ruth Kelly: The Department is today publishing the report of the end to end review of the arrangements for the delivery of financial support to higher education students, and its collection from borrowers, in England. The start of the review was announced on 7 June. Copies of the report are being placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The Department welcomes the report. Its initial response is set out below.
	The principles underpinning the report are that student finance delivery arrangements must meet demand from customers for clear information about their entitlement to support; faster decisions once applications have been made; timely payments upon starting a course; and accurate repayments when these come to be made. They must also meet taxpayers' expectations that value for money is being achieved. While much has been achieved in recent years, the report makes clear that significant further improvements in performance are required. The Department agrees with this analysis and with the challenging new objectives and targets the report recommends.
	The report makes 44 specific recommendations. The Department accepts these in principle, subject to the further detailed work on costs and practicalities which some will require. In particular the Department supports the report's vision of a future in which a large majority of students will apply for financial support online, and the changes which will be needed to achieve this. It welcomes the report's identification of changes which will increase repayments. And it will respond actively to the report's call for DfES leadership to ensure accessible, accurate and consistent information, advice and guidance at national and local level.
	The report also sets out options for a new delivery structure. In the case of assessments and payment, delivery will need to reflect the move to online applications. It will also need to improve the current variability of customer service, and to achieve efficiencies. For these reasons the Department is attracted to the option of a centrally-provided service for which a single organisation would be responsible., working with others to ensure we meet the needs of individuals requiring local assistance. However, this needs to be discussed with local authority representatives given the impact on their staff.
	The report offers three options for the national organisation: an NDPB, a private sector contractor chosen through procurement, and a new relationship with the Student Loans Company. In considering these the Department will focus not only on delivery capability and value for money, but also on which option is most likely to produce the significant cultural shift which the report rightly calls for if the service is to become truly customer-focused. The Department will consider the options in the report for the collections process.
	The Department will now discuss the report with key stakeholders and will make a detailed response in the spring.

Jim Knight: On 19 January 2005 the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) announced that payments under the new CAP Single Payment Scheme (SPS) were expected to commence in February 2006, well within the EU regulatory window of 1 December 2005 to 30 June 2006. Over the past year, staff at the RPA have worked exceedingly hard to ensure that this expectation was turned into a reality.
	At the Efra Select Committee hearing on 11 January my noble Friend Lord Bach made clear that payments would begin, in line with the RPA's forecast, before the end of February and that an announcement would be made by the end of this month on whether they would be full or partial payments. Having considered the latest progress reports on the processing of farmers' claims I am pleased to confirm today that the RPA will now proceed to make full payments. The contingency system to make partial payments will not, therefore, be invoked.
	The RPA will now proceed to definitively establish entitlements on 14 February, details of which will be communicated to individual farmers within two weeks of that date. This will allow for the trading of entitlements to commence in preparation for the 2006 scheme.
	Where 2005 SPS applications have been fully validated, payments will start before the end of February, with the bulk being made in March. In the minority of cases where queries remain unresolved, the validation process will continue beyond March, but farmers may be assured that the RPA will make every effort to complete the task in the shortest possible timeframe.
	I hope this statement will provide some reassurance to the farming industry about the progress of the scheme. I want to acknowledge the co-operation and patience of everyone who has made a claim.

Hazel Blears: I have today placed in the Library a copy of the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2006–07 (HC 845). The report sets out my determination for 2006–07 of the aggregate amount of grants that I propose to pay under section 46(2) of the Police Act 1996, and the amount to be paid to each police authority and to the Greater London Authority for the Metropolitan Police Authority.
	I have also placed in the Library copies of the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2004–05 (Amending Report 2005–06) (HC 847) and the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2005–06 (Amending Report 2005–06). (HC 846) to take account of changes to Office for National Statistics population data and pensions' changes.
	General police grant allocations which include Home Office Police Grant and Revenue Support Grant for each police authority for 2006–07 are set out in Table 1. Amended allocations for 2004–05 and 2005–06 are set out in Tables 2 and 3.
	
		Table 1: Police grant allocations by English & Welsh police authority 2006–07
		
			 Police Authority 2005–06AdjustedAmendedAllocation 2 2006–07Formula GrantAllocation 1 Change on2005–06AdjustedAmendedAllocation 2004–05AmendingReportReceipts/Payments 2005–06AmendingReport Receipt/Payments 2006–07Allocation Net ofAmending ReportReceipts/Payments Change on2005–06 AdjustedAmendedAllocation 
			  £m £m % £m £m £m % 
		
		
			   English Shire authorities 
			 Avon & Somerset 156.5 161.8 3.4% 0.0 -0.1 161.7 3.3% 
			 Bedfordshire 61.6 64.0 3.9% -0.2 -0.2 63.6 3.3% 
			 Cambridgeshire 71.5 73.8 3.2% 0.2 0.0 73.9 3.4% 
			 Cheshire 107.5 110.8 3.1% 0.2 0.2 111.2 3.5% 
			 Cleveland 87.1 89.8 3.1% 0.2 0.1 90.0 3.4% 
			 Cumbria 59.4 61.8 3.9% -0.2 -0.2 61.3 3.1% 
			 Derbyshire 98.8 102.0 3.3% 0.0 0.3 102.3 3.6% 
			 Devon & Cornwall 166.2 171.4 3.1% 0.0 0.0 171.4 3.1% 
			 Dorset 58.2 60.0 3.1% 0.0 0.0 60.0 3.1% 
			 Durham 80.5 84.0 4.3% -0.5 -0.5 83.1 3.1% 
			 Essex 157.7 162.6 3.1% 0.0 0.0 162.6 3.1% 
			 Gloucestershire 52.9 54.5 3.1% 0.0 0.0 54.5 3.1% 
			 Hampshire 184.7 190.4 3.1% 0.0 0.0 190.4 3.1% 
			 Hertfordshire 106.9 110.4 3.2% 0.0 0.0 110.4 3.2% 
			 Humberside 114.2 117.8 3.1% 0.2 0.2 118.3 3.5% 
			 Kent 170.9 176.2 3.1% 0.0 0.0 176.2 3.1% 
			 Lancashire 181.4 187.0 3.1% 0.4 0.2 187.6 3.4% 
			 Leicestershire 103.7 107.5 3.7% -0.3 -0.2 107.0 3.2% 
			 Lincolnshire 56.5 58.3 3.2% 0.0 0.0 58.3 3.2% 
			 Norfolk 77.3 80.5 4.2% -0.5 -0.3 79.7 3.1% 
			 North Yorkshire 68.4 70.5 3.1% 0.0 0.0 70.5 3.1% 
			 Northamptonshire 67.2 69.2 3.1% 0.1 0.0 69.4 3.3% 
			 Nottinghamshire 122.8 127.8 4.0% -0.6 -0.4 126.8 3.2% 
			 Staffordshire 106.9 110.3 3.1% 0.0 0.0 110.3 3.1% 
			 Suffolk 63.3 65.2 3.1% 0.0 0.0 65.2 3.1% 
			 Surrey 90.8 93.6 3.1% 0.0 0.0 93.6 3.1% 
			 Sussex 151.4 156.1 3.1% 0.0 0.0 156.1 3.1% 
			 Thames Valley 211.1 217.9 3.2% 0.0 0.0 217.9 3.2% 
			 Warwickshire 48.1 49.7 3.2% 0.0 0.0 49.6 3.2% 
			 West Mercia 108.6 112.0 3.1% 0.0 0.0 112.0 3.1% 
			 Wiltshire 57.9 59.9 3.4% -0.1 -0.1 59.7 3.1% 
			 Shires Total 3,250.0 3,356.6 3.3% -1.1 -0.9 3,354.6 3.2% 
			   English Metropolitan authorities 
			 Greater Manchester 404.4 417.4 3.2% 0.8 0.3 418.4 3.5% 
			 Merseyside 237.5 245.0 3.1% 0.5 0.5 246.1 3.6% 
			 Northumbria 222.8 229.7 3.1% 0.5 0.2 230.3 3.4% 
			 South Yorkshire 179.8 187.5 4.3% -1.0 -1.1 185.4 3.1% 
			 West Midlands 419.1 433.6 3.4% 0.8 0.0 434.3 3.6% 
			 West Yorkshire 296.6 306.2 3.2% 0.6 0.2 307.0 3.5% 
			 Mets Total 1,760.3 1,819.4 3.4% 2.2 0.1 1,821.6 3.5% 
			   London authorities 
			 GLA—Police 1,763.6 1,818.3 3.1% 4.3 1.0 1,823.5 3.4% 
			 City of London 3 19.5 21.8 N/A -0.1 0.0 21.6 N/A 
			 London Total 1,783.1 1,840.1 N/A 4.1 1.0 1,845.2 N/A 
			 English Total 6,793.3 7,016.1 3.3% 5.2 0.1 7,021.4 3.4% 
			   Welsh authorities 
			 Dyfed-Powys 4 48.5 50.0 3.1% 0.0 0.0 50.1 3.2% 
			 Gwent 4 73.1 75.9 4.0% -0.3 -0.3 75.3 3.1% 
			 North Wales 4 71.0 73.7 3.8% -0.2 -0.2 73.2 3.1% 
			 South Wales 4 161.0 166.1 3.2% 0.1 0.1 166.3 3.3% 
			 Welsh total 353.5 365.7 3.5% -0.4 -0.5 364.9 3.2% 
			 TOTAL 7,146.9 7,381.8 3.3% 4.8 -0.3 7,386.3 3.3% 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Rounded to the nearest £100,000. Grant as calculated under the Local Government Finance Report (England) and Local Government Finance (Police) Report (Wales). This includes the Metropolitan Police special payment, and the effects of floors and scaling.
	2. Allocations made under the Amending Report 2005–06 are adjusted for the transfer of pensions and security funding.
	3. Figures for the City of London relate to Home Office Grant only as calculated in the Police Grant Report (England and Wales). Revenue Support Grant is allocated to the Common Council of the City of London as a whole in respect of all its functions. The City is grouped with education authorities for the purposes of floors.
	4. Welsh figures include Home Office floor funding.
	
		Table 2: Amended allocations for each police authority against original allocations for 2004–05
		
			 Police Authority 2004–05 Original Allocation 1 2004–05 Amended Allocation 1 Change between original and amended 2004–05 
			  £m £m £m % 
		
		
			  English Shire authorities 
			 Avon & Somerset 162.2 162.2 0.0 0.0% 
			 Bedfordshire 62.1 61.9 -0.2 -0.3% 
			 Cambridgeshire 73.4 73.6 0.2 0.2% 
			 Cheshire 107.2 107.5 0.2 0.2% 
			 Cleveland 86.8 87.0 0.2 0.2% 
			 Cumbria 59.6 59.4 -0.2 -0.4% 
			 Derbyshire 101.2 101.2 0.0 0.0% 
			 Devon & Cornwall 166.7 166.7 0.0 0.0% 
			 Dorset 63.6 63.6 0.0 0.0% 
			 Durham 84.2 83.7 -0.5 -0.5% 
			 Essex 160.9 160.9 0.0 0.0% 
			 Gloucestershire 58.9 58.9 0.0 0.0% 
			 Hampshire 190.5 190.5 0.0 0.0% 
			 Hertfordshire 104.8 104.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 Humberside 114.6 114.8 0.2 0.2% 
			 Kent 182.6 182.6 0.0 0.0% 
			 Lancashire 182.9 183.2 0.4 0.2% 
			 Leicestershire 102.0 101.7 -0.3 -0.3% 
			 Lincolnshire 60.6 60.6 0.0 0.0% 
			 Norfolk 82.2 81.7 -0.5 -0.6% 
			 North Yorkshire 72.7 72.7 0.0 0.0% 
			 Northamptonshire 64.3 64.4 0.1 0.2% 
			 Nottinghamshire 127.6 127.0 -0.6 -0.4% 
			 Staffordshire 109.2 109.2 0.0 0.0% 
			 Suffolk 66.0 66.0 0.0 0.0% 
			 Surrey 88.2 88.2 0.0 0.0% 
			 Sussex 158.1 158.1 0.0 0.0% 
			 Thames Valley 212.6 212.6 0.0 0.0% 
			 Warwickshire 49.8 49.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 West Mercia 107.7 107.7 0.0 0.0% 
			 Wiltshire 60.6 60.5 -0.1 -0.2% 
			  English Metropolitan authorities 
			 Greater Manchester 393.2 394.0 0.8 0.2% 
			 Merseyside 248.4 248.9 0.5 0.2% 
			 Northumbria 221.4 221.8 0.5 0.2% 
			 South Yorkshire 178.0 176.9 -1.0 -0.6% 
			 West Midlands 399.3 400.1 0.8 0.2% 
			 West Yorkshire 298.9 299.5 0.6 0.2% 
			  London authorities 
			 GLA—Police 1,822.0 1,826.2 4.3 0.2% 
			 City of London 2 32.7 32.6 -0.1 -0.4% 
			 English Total 6,917.7 6,922.9 5.2 0.1% 
			  Welsh authorities 
			 Dyfed-Powys 3 50.9 50.9 0.0 0.0% 
			 Gwent 3 71.8 71.5 -0.3 -0.4% 
			 North Wales 3 74.8 74.6 -0.2 -0.3% 
			 South Wales 3 168.2 168.3 0.1 0.0% 
			 Welsh total 365.8 365.3 -0.4 -0.1% 
			 TOTAL 7,283.5 7,288.3 4.8 0.1% 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Rounded to the nearest £100,000. Grant as calculated under the Local Government Finance Report (England) and Local Government Finance Report (Wales). This includes the Metropolitan Police special payment, and the effects of floors and scaling.
	2. Home Office Police Grant only.
	3. Allocation figures include Home Office floor payments for Dyfed-Powys, Gwent, North Wales and South Wales.
	
		Table 3: Amended allocations for each police authority against original allocations for 2005–06
		
			 Police Authority 2005–06 Original Allocation 1 2005–06 Amended Allocation 1 Change between original and amended 2005–06 
			  £m £m £m % 
		
		
			  English Shire authorities 
			 Avon & Somerset 170.0 169.9 -0.1 -0.1% 
			 Bedfordshire 65.1 65.0 -0.2 -0.2% 
			 Cambridgeshire 77.9 77.9 0.0 0.0% 
			 Cheshire 111.3 111.5 0.2 0.2% 
			 Cleveland 90.9 90.9 0.1 0.1% 
			 Cumbria 62.1 61.9 -0.2 -0.4% 
			 Derbyshire 105.0 105.2 0.3 0.3% 
			 Devon & Cornwall 173.0 173.0 0.0 0.0% 
			 Dorset 66.0 66.0 0.0 0.0% 
			 Durham 87.8 87.3 -0.5 -0.5% 
			 Essex 167.0 167.0 0.0 0.0% 
			 Gloucestershire 61.1 61.1 0.0 0.0% 
			 Hampshire 197.7 197.7 0.0 0.0% 
			 Hertfordshire 108.8 108.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 Humberside 118.9 119.1 0.2 0.2% 
			 Kent 189.5 189.5 0.0 0.0% 
			 Lancashire 190.8 191.0 0.2 0.1% 
			 Leicestershire 107.7 107.5 -0.2 -0.2% 
			 Lincolnshire 63.4 63.3 0.0 0.0% 
			 Norfolk 85.9 85.6 -0.3 -0.4% 
			 North Yorkshire 75.4 75.4 0.0 0.0% 
			 Northamptonshire 67.8 67.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 Nottinghamshire 133.3 133.0 -0.4 -0.3% 
			 Staffordshire 113.3 113.3 0.0 0.0% 
			 Suffolk 68.5 68.5 0.0 0.0% 
			 Surrey 91.5 91.5 0.0 0.0% 
			 Sussex 164.0 164.0 0.0 0.0% 
			 Thames Valley 220.6 220.6 0.0 0.0% 
			 Warwickshire 51.8 51.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 West Mercia 111.8 111.8 0.0 0.0% 
			 Wiltshire 62.9 62.8 -0.1 -0.2% 
			  English Metropolitan authorities 
			 Greater Manchester 412.5 412.8 0.3 0.1% 
			 Merseyside 257.7 258.3 0.5 0.2% 
			 Northumbria 232.2 232.3 0.2 0.1% 
			 South Yorkshire 185.7 184.6 -1.1 -0.6% 
			 West Midlands 426.5 426.5 0.0 0.0% 
			 West Yorkshire 313.6 313.8 0.2 0.1% 
			  London authorities 
			 GLA—Police 1,927.8 1,928.8 1.0 0.1% 
			 City of London 2 35.7 35.7 0.0 0.0% 
			 English Total 7,252.3 7,252.4 0.1 0.0% 
			  Welsh authorities 
			 Dyfed-Powys 3 52.2 52.3 0.0 0.0% 
			 Gwent 3 74.1 73.8 -0.3 -0.4% 
			 North Wales 3 78.3 78.0 -0.2 -0.3% 
			 South Wales 3 174.5 174.6 0.1 0.0% 
			 Welsh total 379.1 378.7 -0.5 -0.1% 
			 TOTAL 7,631.4 7,631.1 -0.3 0.0% 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Rounded to the nearest £100,000. Grant as calculated under the Local Government Finance Report (England) and Local Government Finance Report (Wales). This includes the Metropolitan Police special payment, and the effects of floors and scaling.
	2. Home Office Police Grant only.
	3. Allocation figures include Home Office floor payments for Dyfed-Powys, Gwent, North Wales and South Wales.

Hilary Benn: The Afghan and UK Governments are signing a 10-year Development Partnership Arrangement at an international conference on Afghanistan in London on 31 January and 1 February 2006. At the conference the Afghan Government will launch the Afghanistan Compact (a framework for the international community's engagement in Afghanistan over the next five years) and its interim National Development Strategy.
	The purpose of the Development Partnership Arrangement is to reaffirm the UK Government's long-term commitment to the Afghan Government's development plans, and set out the nature of this arrangement. Afghanistan has achieved good progress since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 under a Government committed to reducing poverty. But as a new democracy, emerging from conflict and constrained by weak capacity, low revenue and a dominant narcotics industry, Afghanistan risks regressing without long-term commitment from the international community. We hope a 10-year DPA will help build the Afghan Government's confidence and further strengthen its commitment to reducing poverty.
	The DPA covers only UK commitments on international development assistance provided through the Department for International Development (DFID). The DPA also transparently sets out Afghan Government commitments needed for DFID to continue with substantial long-term development support. These include commitments on reducing poverty and the Millennium Development Goals; respecting human rights and other relevant international obligations; and strengthening financial management and accountability, which reduces the risk of funds being misused through weak administration or corruption. The DPA specifies what each Government will commit to, and what happens if the Afghan Government are in breach of a commitment. These commitments should help to strengthen the Afghan Government's planning and budgeting through more effective delivery and use of aid, resulting in greater impact on poverty. Through the DPA, the UK Government are outlining an indicative financial commitment of £330 million from DFID for 2006–09, as part of a larger UK spend in Afghanistan expected at around £500 million in total over a period of three years. DFID is committing to give the Afghan Government aid figures on a three-year rolling basis in future years to increase funding predictability; and to channel at least 50 per cent. of its funding through the Government's budget, in order to strengthen state capacity and institutions.

Ilex Urban Regeneration Company Limited